Occupy not Over

Interestingly enough the connection to world politik, American cultural complacency and widespread public ignorance could not be more clear. A battered Occupy movement now relegated to tabling in front of a courthouse. I guess the anti-Occupy won. The silent majority spoke, within their designated lines a few Fridays ago, as well as in the local media with the Journal's Feb. 16 cover, "Concrete Activists: As the courthouse camp crumbles, occupy protesters seek more fertile ground." The feature inside, while being fairly sympathetic to the movement, signals a departure from the traditional liberal leanings of this county's demographic.

Generally, when print media, yes even the purported liberal media here, pigeonholes one activist and highlights only the critical comments of those "activists" who don't like the direction the current Occupy is going, it can only be counterproductive to those who are still pounding the streets with the message. It seeks to tokenize the occupiers as archaic, arcane, and ineffective, while at the same time media rhetoric continues padding the nests of the current "privileged caste" in this county. The Occupy questions still remain: Why are there rich people? Who writes the rules in Humboldt? Who owns the land? What public officials kowtow to property holders and exclusive members of private clubs? Why is police intelligence targeting those without home and the poor? Is "white collar" crime not as, if not more, nefarious as crimes committed by economically underprivileged people?

Unfortunately, the Journal article frames Occupy as losing members. Even Howard Zinn (rest his soul) said that "you can't be neutral on a moving train." Is this Humboldt Occupy not in that same revolutionary vein as well? When good people do nothing, they are about as bad as the criminals. But have hope, Journal readers, and maybe go down to the courthouse and join.